chris540

My Feedback: (5)

Need some advice cant decide which radio to buy. Is it worth the big price difference for the 9z?
please help
thanks

JohnW

My Feedback: (6)

I'd say yes, the ZAP is worth it, but then again I use many of the advanced features on the ZAP. The CAP is a very capable radio. If you do not foresee needing programming beyond what the CAP can do, I'd say get the CAP, otherwise get the ZAP.

wjjones

My Feedback: (3)

Where are you in this hobby?

I have a 9C and I have used it for fly everything from 2 channel park flyers to a sailplane with 10 servos. I have 10 planes programmed into my 9C and I just got out out of helis. The 9C has way more features than I can use and is very easy to program.

(IMHO) Unless you're the upper 1% ( I'd even say upper .1%) of this hobby, you don't probably need a 9Z.

FLYBOY

My Feedback: (11)

I have the 9chp. Best radio there is. I haven't used the Z radios, but I have done just about everything in the hobby and the CHP can do it all. Like the others have said, unless you are doing way extreme stuff, the C model will do it. You won't be dissapointed.

Dazzler

My Feedback: (6)

I fly both planes, and Heli's with the 9CAP and it does everything I need it to do, and more for both planes, and heli's. I've never owned a Zap, but I cant imagine needing anymore radio than the 9C. Its an awesome radio, Daz...

MHawker

My Feedback: (16)

I'm in agreement with the above about the 9C. Unless you have a need for the advanced capabilities of the the 9Z, I don't think it's worth the extra money. It's a great radio, but just WAY more than 99% of us need.

I love my 9C.

Mike

chris540

My Feedback: (5)

looks like i'll go with the 9cap.
thanks for all the feedback you just saved me alot of money

thanks again

Dazzler

My Feedback: (6)

Wise choice Grasshopper!!! Daz...

mvigod

I ended up with both of them late this summer! I now have a 9Z and a 9C.

Both are very nice. The things that initially drew me to the 9Z were the synthesized frequency as all my rx's are on different channels plus the built in tach and voltmeter I thought were cool. The 9C has much of the features that most pilots would use and is easier to come up to speed in terms of programming. The wheel on it is also very easy to use for programming. I got both radios at almost the same time this year so was able to compare side by side.

If you don't think you need any of the features that the 9Z has that the 9C doesn't have than go with the 9C. If you do need some of the very advanced features or want to be able to have a synth module then the 9Z is a sweet radio. I'd be happy if I only had one or the other but having both is a blessing.

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

I have to agree with most here. It seems that Futaba has shot themselves in big toe, as the 9C is so capable, that there is little real reason to go with the 9Z for most of us. I have a 9ZWCII, and have used the 9C. If I had to do it all over againg, I'd probably just get the 9C.

Same with JR 10X. They are coming out with a 9X. I wonder if it won't have the same effect.

cwboomer

Does anyone think Futaba might be thinking that the 9C might "replace" the 9Z and they might come out with a 10-12 to overtake the 9z with maybe some new innovations?

Just my speculation.

Just my $.02 but I agree with the 9z being for the upper echelon of the hobby. In fact, the 9c is almost spoiling the rest of us! I am glad such a feature packed radio is available sub $400.

Mine will show up today. I hope to have it get me through the next couple 2,3 years. Although the sticks on the 9Z so rock, but weren't worth the doubled price.

Steve Campbell2

There is NO way the 9C will "replace" the 9Z.

The 9C is a very capable radio, and more than enough for 90% of the modelers out there.

But the 9Z has features the 9C cannot approach, much less duplicate. A friend bought a 9C last year. It is serving him well, but he is already planning on getting a 9Z. He is out of mixes and there are strill things he would like to try.

The vast array of features the 9Z has are not window dressing. They are very useful. I bit the bullet and bought one earlier this year. On the one hand, I kick myself for not doing it sooner, now that I see just how far ahead of anything else, except perhaps MultiPlex, this thing is.

On the other hand, I'm glad I waited; otherwise, I would not have the latest WC2 version.

Still, there have been persistent rumors of a new Futaba 12 -channel. But with JR consistently lagging behind in the radio-feature sweepstakes, one wonders just how much effort Futaba is putting into it.

I, for one, could not care less. The 9Z has more than I will ever use.

Steve

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

Not sure how many mixes the 9C has, and that would probably limit its use for me. I typically require about 3 or 4 mixes at most if the other features are built in. and maybe 5 or 6 if they are not.

The 12 channel would get an immediate purchase from me. I just sold my two 9ZWCII's to pick up a pair of JR 10X's. The 9Z only had 8 usable channels, while the 10X had 10 usable channels. The extra channels are far more important to me than the features. In fact, I save a few mixers because of the additional 2 channels. And now that I am getting into jets, I can see why the jet jockeys are mostly flying 10X's. They really really need the 10 full channels.

If Futaba comes out with a 12 channel (real 12 channels, not 10 plus two useless on/off binary switches), I'd switch back in a heart beat.

JohnW

My Feedback: (6)

I gotta agree with Steve... the 9CAP cannot replace the 9ZAP, but the CAP is a good compromise for cost vs features.

A buddy of mine also bought a 9CAP last summer. I helped him setup a 33% on it. The 9CAP is very capable, but there were a few "tricks" I wanted to help him setup on his radio that I could not pull off, but I could on my ZAP. Granted, what I was trying to do was probably in the 1% area of what most people program.

I bought my ZAP before I really needed the features it offered. However, within a few months I was using may of the advanced features. It is amazing how well just about any plane will fly with the proper mixes and conditions. Additionally, it is amazing how much your pilot skills can improve with a well behaved plane. The ZAP is so flexible with the multiple conditions, point curve mixes, assign anything to anything, etc. that mixing is basically only limited to the pilots skill in seeing what is wrong in the air (or how he/she would prefer the plane to react, etc.) and knowing what mix is required to fix the issue.

I think a lot of people miss the point that a good radio setup can make worlds of difference. For probably 90% of pilots or more, the CAP is more than enough radio and will do everything they ask of it. I however cannot live without my ZAP.

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

What kind of difficulties did you run into on the CAP? While I used one briefly, I couldn't find anything missing that would cause most people any concerns. Just curious what important stuff I would miss regarding airplane setup.

I am assuming that it would be more than capable of all the typical mixes (which I find most people don't even get that far), include knife edge mixes, differential, A-E-F-R mixes, down line trim/throttle, etc. I also thought it had some multi-point mixes, but could be wrong. It was a while ago.

If you can nail those mixes, along with dynamic trimming, you can tame most any plane, as well as most 3D setups.

JohnW

My Feedback: (6)

sfaust: There was a complex mix I was trying to set up that the CAP that it could not pull off - 99% of pilots could care less. I thought I clearly stated that I was in a 1% area of programming that most people don't enter.

As for CAP limitations when compared to the ZAP, there are many. The most significant is that the CAP doesn't support conditions like the ZAP does. How important are these high end features like conditions? Depends upon who you ask. Most pilots don't even know what conditions are and they could care less if their radio doesn't support them. I however can't imagine going back to a radio that didn't support conditions.

I didn't mean to imply that the CAP can not do all the mixes most pilots want. For that matter my Futaba 6X did just about everything. I was just making a point that radio setup is as important as building straight. Maybe it came off as I was implying you needed a ZAP to program properly... that wasn't what I was trying to say.

RS2K

My Feedback: (8)

I was lucky enough to come across a 9ZHP for a very good price. I just got it yesterday and am now in the process of setting it up on my heli. I am coming from a 7UHF and am completely blown away by the 9Zs functionality! The most important thing to me is the 13 throttle point curves. They are tougher to set up but the flexibility is amazing. This is the first time I've been able to use conditions but I can already see how useful they can be. I'm planing on getting an airplane with servos everywhere just so I can have fun with it. I also like how simple it is to go from menu to menu and go to any part of the radio programing I want in just a few "clicks." The 9Z is also a very comfortable radio; it is easy to use both with thumbs and with fingers and a neck strap. It's nice that Futaba went to the trouble to balance it. The knife edge flight mix will be helpful on my Ultra Sport, too!

WreckRman2

My Feedback: (5)

The 9C has 7 programmable mixes as well as several features that required us to use mixes for in the past such as dual elevator servos.

9Z radio has 5 fully programmable mixes available per condition and 8 conditions available per model for 40 total conditions available.

That's the big benifit of the 9Z, the flight conditions.

LSP972

My Feedback: (13)

>

Yup. They say ignorance is bliss, and that was the case for me.

It really boils down to a matter of "seeing is believing". Somebody can 'splain it you until they are blue in the face; but until you actually see just how flexible and feature-laden the 9Z is, you simply won't understand.

That is NOT a shot at anybody; just the truth. I had friends for years telling me to switch, that I would be amazed, etc. And these were people who's opinions I respected and usually listened to. But I knew better, see?

Well, I finally woke up.

Steve

HarryC

My Feedback: (1)

Though I am not a Futaba user, I second the sentiments of those who say you need to experience the top radio to understand what you are missing. It is not something that can be easily explained but if you fly more complex models or want to just do better aerobatics or more realistic scale flight with everyday models, the top radios do make a difference. They make it easier and more enjoyable. With some nifty mixing, multi-point curves and conditions, models with grumpy handling can be transformed into sweety pies. Good models can be made into angels. The radios can't do anything for your flying ability but they can do a lot for the model's flyability.

I slowly worked my way up to the best radio of a different manufacturer, wondering to myself why I was spending all that money on something so ridiculously over the top that I could never make use of it. But I soon did make use of it and now I am so glad that I bought it.

If you can afford a 9Z and you want to stick with Futaba, get it instead of a 9C. The only caveat to these top radios is that you must be prepared to program them in order to make the best of them - if you are, they can do wonderful things for your plane.

Harry

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

Hmmmm.... I didn't mean to come across that way. I apologize.

I never took your reply to mean that the CAP was substandard in any way, or that one would need a ZAP as the only way to setup planes properly. Its just that in my limited time with the CAP, I briefly tried to see what important stuff might be missing. At the time, I really didn't see any.

However, I didn't think conditions either.

I am also with you in that 1% range. I think trying to pull off a setup where I share a single channel with a smoke pump, glitch detector, and an ignition kill switch ,mixed to the throttle, with a cutoff switch for the smoke, another for the ignition kill, and a variable slider to adjust the smoke on point clearly put me in that 1% range.

Trying to set that up taught me a lot about mixing, function and switch assignment, mixing modes, ratios, conditions, trim link, offsets, and multi link mixing. It was interesting figuring out how to do it on the 9Z, but I did it. I was also surprised that I could duplicate it on the JR 10X as well. That radio is far more capable than some give it credit.

Anyway, good point about the conditions, and that is what my question was looking for. While the CAP can handle all the mixing, it won't 3D without conditions. Thats how Futaba keep from shooting themselves in the foot. I can't see flying 3D without conditions or flight modes (as JR calls them). And you are right, I couldn't see going back without flight modes. Once you've tried them, you are hooked.

There is a lot of fluff on the 9Z, but conditions aren't one of them. Granted, its a terrible implementation, but they are there.

I actually wrote a long a hopefully unbiased review on the 9Z and 10X radios on my web site. I got to know every inch of the 9Z and 10X radios. But there are some dark corners that still need exploring.

Chris 540

My Feedback: (3)

Nice screen name man!!!

I like my 9Z because of the conditions. I would never get rid of it. Great radio.

JohnW

My Feedback: (6)

sfaust: No apology needed. It is hard sometimes to write posts in such a way to make them crystal clear. I though that maybe I wrote one of those "what in the heck did that mean?" posts. I just wanted to clarify what I thought I wrote.

As for 3D, the CAP does support triple rates which I assume most would use for Low/High/3D. The kicker is most mixes for 3D are very different than the mixes needed in normal flight. I believe the mixes can be assigned to switches on the CAP so it would be possible to assign special 3D mixes to the DR switch when it is in the 3D position. This is assuming you have enough mixes. I think the CAP has 7 total. I think it is possible to get a reasonable 3D setup on the CAP, but it would be much easier and more flexible on the ZAP.

The more I think about it, the only really major issue with CAP vs ZAP that I can isolate is conditions. There are some other issues like 5pt curve mixes vs 11pt on the ZAP, but that stuff is minor compared to the conditions. Then again, the CAP costs a lot less than the ZAP. If the CAP did have conditions at that price I'd be a bit hot since I just bought a ZAP two years ago.

sfaust

My Feedback: (11)

]

If it has enough mixes, and some being multi-point, it does sound like the CAP would be a nice alternative to the 9Z. The multi-point mixes would allow one to configure for the mix changes in 3D mode.

Of course, with triple rates (are they real triple rates, or fake ones like on the 9Z?), I would image a good pilot could abstain from the mixes altogether, and just fly the sticks! I know Frank Knoll used to pride himself on the fact he didn't use any mixing, and he does nice 3D air work Me, I'll take the crutch for now. When I get that good, I'll try walking without them.

Pugsley-RCU

My Feedback: (15)

it was an older one. The 9ZAP. It was a very nice radio but way complicated. I guess I never really figured out conditions. I knew what I thought a condition was, and how I wanted the plane to react, but could never really get it to work the way I wanted.

I'm interested in what you guys call "true 3D conditions". I mean with my current radio, the 9C, I have set up multipoint KE mixing to vary with rudder input. I have set up triple rates and throttle curves but I guess maybe I am missing something else that I could do for 3D flight.

What are you guys doing for 3D mixes?

Thanks,

Pug